JabsDabbin

I like this update. Thank you!

nullTid at 50nm Tid range does filter the lock specific target menu though. I can usually manage to lock at least one of the contacts, regardless of source (own radar/datalink) but jester, or the radar, rarely will build tracks for those contacts nearby. Which is probably more a limitation/result of TWS auto mode or some other parameter maybe. I didn't think of this earlier ( that I usually let jester/auto tws do its thing). null

I see. Now that you mention it, perhaps I should be clearer about what happens ( see below) Idk why i came up with 30nm I rounded it off or something and in general don't look at numbers too specifically unless math. Instead of actually 'prioritizing', it's more so that jester hooks/highlights a target far away, not commanding the radar to build a track perse. However, he does move the antenna for this. I can't tell if he moves the antenna because he can or if he's trashing missiles. my missiles fly on interpolated tracks all the time because of it. Seemingly at least. But just as annoying, I actually have to memorize the altitudes at jesters whim because chances are he wont highlight the target again even tho it's well within missile launch parameters. Not sure if the following matters but: TID range failed me when I told jester to set it very late, when it/the radar had already build at least some tracks further away. I'll try recording my next flights

I tried using TID range (the one you can tell jester to set as a pilot) and even with tid range at 30nm jester hooked targets 70nm out, invisible on the tid repeater.

1. Why would you want to lock a friendly deliberately? I can imagine some situations where you're trying to meet up maybe but especially in the context of combat, it's rarely needed/wanted? When it concerns a bug ideally the bug just gets fixed but if its critical I would just mark a contact as unidentified if i can only detect the bug but for some reason don't have access to all of the systems internals.( Meaning situations where the bug just can not be fixed without a serious overhaul somewhere deeper). a separate lock friendly menu option would not be a bad solution either. The main thing here being that the information should be sorted already. However, a hook cursor like someone else mentioned would be even better. I often find myself just not having enough time to process the stuff required to deal with the current system. 2. Thanks for the tip I did not consider that! I still don't think it's ideal because you'd lose situational awareness but I'll go try it out! Good to hear such progress is already underway.

Hi. I found that both jester and iceman have some issues that are probably fairly easy to solve and I'd like to collect improvements and suggestions in this thread so that Heatblur can refer to it if they want to. Jester: Friendly contacts should not be shown when trying to select a specific target, assuming they are already identified. Unidentified targets should show of course. While there are bandits, be it on data link or on radar, nearby, jester really should not be prioritizing threats 100nm out, a simple distance setting which can act as a sort of deadzone, prioritizing any targets in it first, always, might provide a solution. the system to set a distance and height to scan at is rather clunky and has failed me more often than not. If I know a target is out there, I just have to hop in jesters seat and lock it myself instead. iceman: iceman really does it own thing, even overriding attitude autopilot. Best behaviour imo would be if iceman just did not touch the controls unless not doing so would destroy the aircraft. He should maintain attitude regardless of autopilot setting. (or just not touch the stick especially if auto pilot is on and in altitude mode) setting mach speed while above mach .7 is probably a better solution than increasing speed by x knots. The biggest issue here is the lack of feedback about which speed it's currently set to.

1. F15C: Not sure if the pre-patch behaviour was wrong instead but since the last patch (open beta), the max aero and the other weapon range indicator disappears once you select the aim 7 mh missile mid-flight. 2. FC3 RWR in general: It seems that the radar warning receiver doesn't work properly anymore. This for sure also affects the fc3 a10. Namely, it's a bit of a lottery draw whether an active RADAR missile triggers a warning. In the f15c I've also experienced erroneous SAM lock and launch indications. To then die to a player launched radar missile.... I'm not 100% sure about the second issue but it does seem something has changed. Only played online since last patch. If someone has some tracks please share them as I have no idea how to get them from servers.

Can confirm. Not just limited to tws, radar essentially doesn't work anymore. In TWS, one can cycle through imaginary targets (the direction cue/vector goes haywire, circling around the hud). Using the 'normal' radar mode, it seems that the target gets locked for a split second only to be unlocked immediately. Also, update seems to have impacted performance in general, negatively, resulting in slightly higher max cpu temperatures, in my case at least. The frequency of 'load spikes' by lack of a better definition seem to have increased as well.

Seems I didn't do it properly, thank you!

How to get rid of it?

Yes well, that's why I decided to mention my findings here. I'm simply new to simulation at this level of realism. As well new to DCS. I decided war thunder wasn't kicking it anymore for me not too long ago and well, here I am. I'm only roughly aware of/familiar with all these systems and definitely don't know the ins and outs of all available hardware in the game. You can take an f14 in the growling sidewinder server though and you should be able to get such long range scenario's quite easily. ( I usually fly with tid at 200nm range and data link initially, switching to 100nm at lower altitudes, last night I joined 5 minutes before restart and managed to get a tws lock at 80.xx nm moments after take off) IIRC, the most distant lock so far has been around 95nm. W/o really knowing what i'm locking that is pretty meaningless though. Also, 70nm sure is a huge distance, I don't think it's not enough, I was just wondering if it was a mission or radar limitation

I can consistently both tws and (pd) stt lock targets above 80nm but this happens only in multiplayer(I haven't tried the campaigns yet), I do not have visual proof atm but next time I'll do it i'll save the track/a record. I always use data link if available. One time I chased such a target down and killed it wvr and it was a helicopter. I can imagine a helicopter being highly reflective though (the main rotor blades) when its below a radar.

Thank you, that would make the most sense, it's great practice in its current state though

I edited the units not sure if you responded to the initial post. But that's largely irrelevant in all honesty. The max locking distance raises eyebrows because I've been able to lock small stuff/helicopters further away. But i'm fairly new to this level of realism so a radar limitation was my second best guess. About cranking, I would agree that yes that is the most sensible thing to do but i was under the impression that cranking is a modern tactic which was not in widespread in use when the f14 entered service. Also realize that a missile with a much lower theoretical max range manages to out-speed the phoenix in this engagement and that just seems wrong. The JF's don't lock and fire until 45-55nm.

I can't for the life of me complete* the marianas instant action mission hunting the jeff. W/o cranking the jf's sd-10 missile tends to hit just after the first aim54 goes active. I probably killed maybe 5 JF's in a good 20-30 attempts(maybe even more lol). Missiles launched 40k ft alt at mach 1.2+, tried distances from earliest possible (+- 70nm in tws or 75nm pd stt lock, is this engagement 'hard locked' to only allow radar locks within this distance?) to 45nm but anything less than 60nm basically ensures the SD-10 will land first pushing me on the defensive. * Almost completed it once but shot 3 of the 4 jf's WVR